Of booze, cigs, and Happy Meals

Warning: Rant Ahead

Okay, so I want to start with the new way cigarettes are packaged. Recently the FDA ruled to require that the cartons and packs no longer say "light" since that means some people may think it means light in tobacco, not light in flavor. Then just this week Washington state implemented a ban on alcoholic energy drinks (like Tilt, Sparks, and 4 Loko, the intended target). This was due to a college party in October where some no-so-positive things happen. No one died, however, and no one was injured. They just all got really really drunk.

So what is the point about linking these two things? The government is coming in and dictating what people can and cannot do beyond what I think should be their boundary. The argument for the tobacco is dumb because most smokers do realize it means flavor, not content or reduced risk. As for the drinks, they argue that caffeine and alcohol together in one drink makes people drink more. This is probably true, but what else are they going ban? Selling Red Bull and vodka to a person at the same time? Selling soda and alcohol? How about banning both from being sold in the same store altogether? Get real. Yes, I realize that is somewhat of a slippery slope argument, but it's true to a degree. They cannot control people's behavior. They also have to realize that folks have free will and personal responsibility. Hopefully they will not do the same thing again, and if they, who cares? It is their life as long as they don't hurt anyone else. If they die in a car crash, sorry, but that was their choice. They knew they were drinking and should not drive. Like they say, buzzed driving is drunk driving. Of course it is sad when someone young loses their life, but that's the way it goes. The same thing applies to those who banned Happy Meals in San Fransisco. If a parent wants to let their kid eat something that does not go bad or degrade after a few months, it is not your business. People can do what they want. Back off and let them.